Investigating the Relation between Ergonomics and ...€¦ · efficiency of hotel kitchen staff. It...

Journal of Faculty of Tourism and Hotels-University of Sadat City Vol.3, Issue 1, June 2019

- 110 -

Investigating the Relation between Ergonomics and Efficiency of

Hotel Kitchen Staff

Jehan El-Amir1 Abdel-Moneim Omar

1

1Faculty of Tourism and Hotels, University of Sadat City

Abstract

The most valuable asset of an organization is related to its human resources.

Managerial sciences have established new approaches and tools for work, to

best use human actions to increase efficiency. This study concentrates on

ergonomics as one of these approaches. Therefore, it investigates the awareness

of kitchen staff about ergonomics. It also explores the relation between the

ergonomics and the efficiency of the hotel kitchen staff. Questionnaire was

developed to achieve these objectives. Correlations and regression analysis

were used to analyze the returned 36 questionnaire forms collected from five-

star Hotels in Cairo. The results indicated that hotel kitchen staff highly

perceives the ergonomics practices. As expected, significant relationship was

found between ergonomics dimensions and the work efficiency of the hotel

kitchen staff. Especially, general physical activity, workplace design, and work

environment (0.727**

, 0.672**

, 0.533**

), respectively.

Keywords: Ergonomics, Kitchen Staff, Hotels, Efficiency.

Introduction

Ergonomics from the Greek word ergon meaning work and nomoi meaning

natural laws, is the science of making the design of products, equipment and

spaces easy to use for human beings (Joshi, 2016). “Ergonomics (or human

factors) is the scientific discipline concerned with the understanding of the

interactions among humans and other elements of a system (interrelated

activities with joint purpose i.e. software, hardware, buildings, spaces, people

and community), and the profession that applies theoretical principles, data and

methods to design.” (Dul et al., 2012; Hollnagel, 2014).

Ergonomics as we know them now became a recognized scientific discipline in

the late 1940s under the name of human factors engineering. There were of

course intellectual pioneers, such as polish researcher, Jastrzebowski‟s proposal

for a „science of work‟ (1857), but in more practical terms which means doing

something rather than just disagreeing about it. Scientific Management theory

(Taylor, 1911) from the early 20th century is as good a place to begin. The

purpose of Scientific Management was very practical, namely to analyze and

synthesize work flows in order to improve labour productivity. Scientific

Management introduced a number of principles and techniques that are still

being widely used, although their origin may have been forgotten. Examples

are bottom-up task analysis, time and motion studies, and task decomposition

(Hollnagel, 2014).


- 111 -

Although Human Factors Engineering (HFE) defines itself as being about the

design of work, it can also be understood as being about „the human use of

human beings‟ as how we „use‟ ourselves as part of society. One result of this

is that HFE strictly speaking changes from being the science of work, or even

the science of workplace design, to become the science of managing work of

communication and control in work situations (Wiener, 1954). It analyzes the

potential of machines to make larger human capabilities, and thereby release

them from the monotony of manual labour (Hollnagel, 2014).

In general, ergonomics provides a means for modifying the work environment

and work practices to prevent injuries before they occur. Effective ergonomic

design provides work procedures, tools and equipment which are comfortable,

efficient for the employee to use and creates a work environment that is

healthy. Inappropriate and poor working postures, lack of task variation, poor

ergonomic design of workplace and work organization (e.g long working

hours, low salaries and awkward schedules, poor training and lack of

promotion) are all areas where simple interventions can remarkably reduce the

rate of exposure to occupational disease (Joshi, 2016).

The goal of HFE is described as trying “to ensure that any designed artefact,

ranging from a consumer product to an organizational environment, is shaped

around the abilities and aspirations of humans” (Dul et al., 2012). The problem

is no longer human interaction with machines, but rather human management

of machines that strongly interact with each other (Hollnagel, 2014).

Dul et al. (2012) emphasized that HFE is “design driven” and can be involved

in all stages of planning, design, implementation, evaluation, maintenance,

redesign and continuous improvement of systems. These stages are not

necessarily sequential; they are interdependent and dynamic. Decisions at one

stage may affect or be affected by decisions at other stages.” In the established

HFE perspective, the performance is related to the output or product of work,

referring to such issues as quality, efficiency, or occupational safety and cost.

Hotel operations work to produce something, tangible outputs in some cases

and intangible outputs in other cases (Hollnagel, 2014).

Hospitality Career deals with loud noise, busy environments, heavy, awkward,

sharp, and hot objects, repetitive motions, and stress, all of which can lead to

fatigue, sudden accidents, and long-term musculoskeletal injury (Gentzleraand

and Smither, 2012). Sudden accidents of slip and fall are a serious safety

problem in kitchen environment (Leamon, 1992). The annual direct cost of

occupational injuries due to slips, trips and falls in the USA is estimated to

exceed six billion US dollars (Courtney et al., 2001). Falls on the same level

accounted for nearly 53% of claim costs and 65% of claim cases in total direct

workers‟ compensation for occupational injuries due to slips and falls (Leamon

and Murphy, 1995). Slips are likely to account to many other occupational

injuries in addition to falls.


- 112 -

For example, Hayes-Lundy et al. (1991) reported that 11% of grease burns in

fast-food restaurants were attributed to slips. Roughly 40–50% of falls on the

same level in the USA and European countries are caused by slips (Courtney et

al., 2001). Slippery floors, typically related to contaminants such as water and

grease, are common in restaurant kitchens (Chang et al., 2003) and are a critical

factor for falls on the same level (Chang et al., 2001; Leclercq et al., 2007).

Within the hotel industry in the USA, slips and falls resulted in the most costly

claims (Leamon and Murphy 1995; Chang et al., 2008). Common drivers of

slippery floors include dishwashing overspray or run-off, leaking equipment or

pipes, food debris, and spillage from transport of open containers such as those

holding fryer grease and food wastes (Filiaggi and Courtney, 2003; Chang et

al., 2011).

According to Kohr (1991) slips and falls was the most frequent accident type

for employees working in hotels and restaurants as shown in Fig. 1. Regarding

employee accidents in the present study, it was found that approximately; burns

was 30%, cuts was 35%, and finally slips and falls was 1%.

Source: Kohr (1991).

Figure 1: Accident types of Hotels and Restaurants

Due to the likelihood of contamination by water and/or grease, the sink and

fryer were considered critical working areas in the kitchen (Chang et al., 2003).

According to Chang et al. (2008) all the kitchens visited in their study were

owned by a corporation, the slip-resistant floor mats were not available in their

sink areas, mats were not to cover the whole area in front of the sinks. When

the area is wet, the slip-resistant mat could provide a good slip-resistant

ground, while the friction on the tiles right outside of the mat could be reduced

due to the water contamination. The mat could potentially create high friction

reductions when walking from the mat onto the tile areas, even though the

original intention of putting the slip-resistant mat in the sink, and fryer areas

were to increase friction and improve safety.


- 113 -

Ergonomics decisions are considered not only to the food workers‟

environment itself but to the equipment used in that environment. “The more

sophisticated equipment manufacturers are taking ergonomics into account.

They are looking at anthropometry [the science of body measurements] to

determine things like how much reach should a person be expected to achieve,

how high to set the controls and how much effort a person should be expected

to exert.” (Blair, 2003).

Today‟s changing foodservice environment challenges both equipment

manufacturers and facilities planners to place renewed attention on human

factors engineering and workplace ergonomics. When work areas or equipment

are higher than 36 inches, the placement of rubber floor mats can raise the

employee 1 or 2 inches higher, making the work posture more comfortable. A

major aspect of planning good work station, ergonomics is providing

reasonable reach for items stored on shelves (Frable, 1996).

Hospitality industry has been growing as fast as general tourism industry, there

is an improvement in the hotel management and work efficiency to help

increase more profit for the hotels (Wattanasan, 2015). So, well designed

workstations and work schedules can diminish the risks so that get work done

more efficiently or effectively. Finally, the present study tries to investigate

ergonomics dimensions (skill requirement, general physical activity, manual

materials handling, workplace design, work posture, work environment, work

time schedule, and machinery according to Laurig and Vedder (2012).

Research methodology

The study aims to answer the following questions: To what extent do hotel

kitchen staff has awareness about ergonomics? Do ergonomics practices affect

the work efficiency of hotel kitchen staff at five-star hotels in Cairo? In order to

answer the research questions, the quantitative method was used through a

questionnaire form distributed to five-star hotels in Cairo.

Instrument

The questionnaire consisted of two parts about ergonomics practices and the

efficiency of hotel kitchen staff. It was adapted from (Laurig and Vedder,

2012). The questions in the two parts were measured via a 5-point Likert scale

(1= completely disagree and 5= completely agree). A total of 45 questionnaires

were randomly distributed to hotel kitchen staff in 15 five-star hotel in Cairo.

Only 36 complete questionnaires were received, representing a response rate of

80 percent. This study utilizes the coefficient of Cronbach‟s alpha to compute

the reliability (0.72) that agreed with (Nunnally and Bernstein, 1994). Finally,

data analysis was conducted using Statistical Package for the Social

Sciences (SPSS V.20).


- 114 -

Results and Discussion

Scale Reliability

After data tabulation had been completed and average ergonomics and work

efficiency scores have been calculated, coefficient alpha was computed.

Overall, each of the scales demonstrated an acceptable reliability(α=0.86).

However, even this is above the minimum reliability level endorsed by

Nunnally and Bernestein (1994).

Ergonomics Descriptive Statistics and Correlation Analysis

The descriptive statistics revealed that the hotel kitchen staff have known

before about ergonomics in their environment, the overall average of their

perception was 87.6% as shown in table 1. The study describes the main

dimensions in detail as follows:

Table 1: Ergonomics Descriptive Statistics

Item N Mean Std. Deviation

Skill Requirement 36 4.22 .422

General Physical Activity 36 4.50 .507

Manual Materials Handling

(MMH)

36 4.33 .478

Workplace Design 36 4.39 .494

Work Posture 36 4.61 .494

Work Environment 36 4.33 .478

Work Time Schedule 36 4.36 .487

Machinery 36 4.31 .525

Work Safety 36 4.22 .422

Valid N (listwise) 36

Average Mean 4.38

(87.6%)

Work Posture, and general physical activity and workplace design represent the

highest hotel kitchen staff perception of ergonomics, while MMH, skill

requirement, work environment, work time schedule, machinery and work

safety achieved the least score of ergonomics perception as shown in table 1.

Regarding the correlation between the dimensions of ergonomics and work

efficiency. Table 2 illustrates the correlation matrix. As expected, a positive

correlation between Ergonomics and its dimensions exist; it ranges from

(0.78**) to (0.33*). Similarly, correlations between each of the ergonomics

dimensions and work efficiency were significant, ranging from (0.72**) to

(0.33*). The results showed that general physical activity and workplace design

have the highest positive correlation with work efficiency (r=0.72, p<0.01 and

r=0.67, p<0.01), respectively.


- 115 -

Table 2: Correlation Analysis of Ergonomics Dimensions and Work Efficiency

Skill

Requirement

General

Physical Activity

Manual

Materials Handling

Workplace

Design

Work

Posture

Work

Environment

Work

Time Schedule

Machinery Work

Safety

Work

Efficiency

Skill

Requirement 1.000

.

36

General Physical

Activity .278 1.000

.100 .

36 36

Manual

Materials

Handling

.025 .283 1.000

.886 .094 .

36 36 36

Workplace

Design .184 .798(**) .240 1.000

.283 .000 .159 .

36 36 36 36

Work Posture .273 .798(**) .113 .636(**) 1.000

.108 .000 .514 .000 .

36 36 36 36 36

Work

Environment .197 .589(**) .285 .645(**) .443(**) 1.000

.250 .000 .092 .000 .007 .

36 36 36 36 36 36

Work Time

Schedule .108 .403(*) -.083 .179 .648(**) .124 1.000

.529 .015 .631 .296 .000 .470 .

36 36 36 36 36 36 36

Machinery .157 .458(**) .073 .408(*) .692(**) .198 .729(**) 1.000

.361 .005 .673 .014 .000 .247 .000 .

36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36

Work Safety .104 .535(**) .409(*) .396(*) .426(**) .331(*) -.080 .210 1.000

.546 .001 .013 .017 .010 .049 .644 .219 .

36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36

Work Efficiency .414(*) .727(**) .333(*) .672(**) .441(**) .533(**) .413(*) .395(*) .414(*) 1.000

.012 .000 .047 .000 .007 .001 .012 .017 .012 .

36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36

(*) Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

(**) Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

In line with expectations, significantly and positively correlation with work

efficiency was found; work environment (r=0.53, p<0.01) work posture

(r=0.44, p<0.01), skill requirement (r=0.41, p<0.05), work safety (r=0.41,

p<0.05) work time schedule (r=0.41, p<0.05), machinery (r=0.39, p<0.05) and

MMH (r=0.33, p<0.05).


- 116 -

Regression Analysis

Table 3: Regression Matrix to identify the Coefficients

Ergonomics Dimensions Coefficients

General Physical Activity 0.522

Workplace Design 0.503

Work Environment 0.413

Work Safety 0.354

Skill Requirement 0.354

Work Posture 0.327

Work Time Schedule 0.325

Machinery 0.280

Manual Materials Handling 0.238

Regression analysis was conducted to explore the predictive power of

ergonomics dimensions for work efficiency of hotel kitchen staff. Table 3

identifies the Coefficients, where general physical activity, workplace design

and work environment were the most effective dimensions on the efficiency of

workers (0.522, 0.503 and 0.413), respectively. It was noticed also that the

other dimensions significantly affected the work efficiency in little scores

ranging from 0.238 to 0.354).

Conclusion and Recommendations

It was concluded that general physical activity, workplace design and work

environment are the most correlating and influencing dimensions on work

efficiency of hotel kitchen staff. So, involving people in planning and

controlling a significant amount of their work with sufficient knowledge and

power to achieve desirable goals, is a must for such a strenuous industry.

Applying ergonomics practices can help transform the culture of an

organization into one that values collaboration and harmony in the workplace.

Food production operations are generally standing workplaces. So, workers in

this type of area should be able to stand up straight while working, their arms

close to the body, hands just below the elbow, rotate tasks especially that

require the same motion, working with shoulders in relaxed position, as much

as possible push carts instead of pulling them. It would be beneficial to have

the load at a higher level, and workplace must have anti-fatigue mats to relieve

pressure on feet, legs and backs. Also, arrangement of workplace so, it is easier

to reach for supplies used routinely and prevent awkward back, shoulder and

rest posture, and limit walking distance between fryers and sinks and pick up

area in the central kitchen.

Finally, scientific research has pointed that workers‟ movements (frequency,

intensity, duration, posture, vibration, temperature, etc. are a major concern for

kitchens nowadays, so sprains, strains injuries could be limited by applying

good ergonomic techniques.


- 117 -

References

Blair, A. (2003). With ergonomics, small steps equal big benefits. Nation's

Restaurant News; ProQuest, Pp. 12-13.

Chang, W.R., Cotnam, J.P. and Matz, S. (2003). Field evaluation of two

commonly used slip meters. Applied Ergonomics, 34, Pp. 51–60.

Chang, W.R., Grönqvist, G., and Leclercq, S. Myung, R., Makkonen, L.,

Strandberg, L., Brungraber, R.J., Mattke, U. and Thorpe, S.C. (2001). The

role of friction in the measurement of slipperiness, Part 1: Friction

mechanisms and definition of test condition, Ergonomics, 44(13), Pp.

1217-1232.

Chang, W.R., Li, K.W., Filiaggi, A., Huang, Y.H. and Courtney, T. (2008)

Friction variation in common working areas of fast-food restaurants in the

USA, Ergonomics, 51:12, Pp.1998-2012.

Courtney, T.K., Sorock, G.S., Manning, D.P., Collins, J.W. and Holbein-Jenny,

M.A. (2001). Occupational slip, trip and fall-related injuries: Can the

contribution of slipperiness be isolated? Ergonomics, 44(13), Pp.1118-

1137.

Dul, J., Bruder, R., Buckle, P., Carayon, P., Falzon, P., Marras, W.S., Wilson,

J.R. and van der Doelen, B., (2012). A strategy for human

factors/ergonomics: developing the discipline and

profession. Ergonomics, 55(4), pp.377-395.

Frable, F. (1996). Enhance operational efficiencies with improved ergonomics

Nation's Restaurant News; 30, 32; ProQuest, Pp. 92-93

Gentzlera, M. and Smither, J. (2012). Using practical ergonomic evaluations in

the restaurant industry to enhance safety and comfort: a case study. Work

41, 5529-5531 DOI: 10.3233/WOR-2012-0872-5529, IOS Press.

Hayes-Lundy, C., Ward, R. S., Saffle, J. R., Reddy, R., Warden, G.D. and

Schnebly, W. A. (1991). Grease burns at fast-food restaurants.

Adolescents at risk. Journal of burn care & rehabilitation, 12(2), 203-

208.

Hollnagel, E. (2014). Human factors/ergonomics as a systems discipline? “The

human use of human beings” revisited. Applied Ergonomics, 45, Pp.40-

44.

Joshi, S. (2016). To study the relationship between Ergonomics and Efficiency

of the Housekeeping Employees at Workplace. Atithya: journal of

Hospitality, 2(1), Pp. 37-42.


- 118 -

Kohr R. L. (1991). Accident Prevention for Hotels, Motels, and Restaurants,

Van Nostrand Reinhold.

Laurig, W. and Vedder, J. (2012). Ergonomics. Chapter-29 IN: Part IV Tools

and Approaches, Encyclopedia of occupational health and safety, 4th

Edition.http://www.ilocis.org/documents/chpt29e.htm

Leamon, T.B. and Murphy, P.L. (1995). Occupational slips and falls: more than

a trivial problem. Ergonomics, 38, Pp.487–498.

Leamon, T.B. (1992). The reduction of slip and fall injuries: part II – the

scientific basis (knowledge base) for the guide. International Journal of

Industrial Ergonomics, 10, Pp.29–34.

Leclercq, S., Thouy, S. and Rossignol, E. (2007). Progress in understanding

processes underlying occupational accidents on the level based on case

studies. Ergonomics, 50, Pp.59–79.

Nunnally, J. C. and Bernestein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory. (3rd Ed.).

New York: McGraw-Hill.

Taylor, F.W. (1911). The Principles of Scientific Management. Harper, New

York.

Wattanasan, P. (2015). The Enhancement of Service Quality of the Front

Office for ASEAN Tourists: A Case Study Boutique Hotels in Bangkok.

Master Thesis, NIDA University.

Wiener, N. (1954). The Human Use of Human Beings. Houghton Mifflin Co.,

Boston.

http://www.ilocis.org/en/contilo.html

http://www.ilocis.org/en/contilo.html

http://www.ilocis.org/documents/chpt29e.htm


- 119 -

Appendix

“Questionnaire”

Please identify to what extent you agree or disagree with the following

statements on a scale of 1 to 5 as follows:

Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree

1 2 3 4 5

Item

Skill Requirement

Job requires knowledge and skillful ability. 1 2 3 4 5

Job demands training for skill acquisition. 1 2 3 4 5

Worker makes frequent mistakes at work. 1 2 3 4 5

General Physical Activity

Job implies frequently repeated movements. 1 2 3 4 5

Job demands high muscular strength exertion. 1 2 3 4 5

Job (operation of handle, steering wheel, pedal brake) is predominantly

static work. 1 2 3 4 5

Job requires fixed working position (sitting or standing). 1 2 3 4 5

Manual Materials Handling (MMH)

Mode of work (pull). 1 2 3 4 5

Mode of work (push). 1 2 3 4 5

Mode of work (turn). 1 2 3 4 5

Mode of work (lift). 1 2 3 4 5

Mode of work (lower). 1 2 3 4 5

Mode of work (carry). 1 2 3 4 5

Subject load height (Ground). 1 2 3 4 5

Subject load height(knee). 1 2 3 4 5

Subject load height(waist). 1 2 3 4 5

Subject load height(chest). 1 2 3 4 5

Subject load height (shoulder level). 1 2 3 4 5

Workplace Design

Work distance is away from normal reach in the horizontal or vertical

plane.

Height of work desk/equipment is fixed or minimally adjustable. 1 2 3 4 5

No space for subsidiary operations (e.g., inspection and maintenance). 1 2 3 4 5

Workstations have obstacles, protruding parts or sharp edges. 1 2 3 4 5

Work surface floors are slippery, uneven, cluttered or unstable. 1 2 3 4 5

Sufficient auxiliary support is available for safety at the workplace. 1 2 3 4 5

Doorways, entrance/exit routes, or corridors are restricted. 1 2 3 4 5

Limited use of gloves/footwear to work and operate equipment controls. 1 2 3 4 5


- 120 -

Work Posture

Working with arms above shoulder and/or away from the body. 1 2 3 4 5

Hyperextension of wrist and demand of high strength. 1 2 3 4 5

Back bent and twisted. 1 2 3 4 5

Work Environment

Noise level is below the maximum sound level recommended. 1 2 3 4 5

Climate is comfortable. 1 2 3 4 5

Temperature sensation is suitable. 1 2 3 4 5

Workers do not wear heat protective/assistive clothing. 1 2 3 4 5

Workplace/machine(s) are sufficiently illuminated at all times. 1 2 3 4 5

Visual displays (warning signals) are easy to read. 1 2 3 4 5

Displayed information is not easily understood. 1 2 3 4 5

Environment is free from excessive dust fumes and toxic substances. 1 2 3 4 5

Workers are effectively protected against radiation exposure. 1 2 3 4 5

Machine can be operated without vibration transmission to the operator‟s

body. 1 2 3 4 5

Work Time Schedule

Job requires night work. 1 2 3 4 5

Job involves overtime/extra work time. 1 2 3 4 5

Heavy tasks are unevenly distributed throughout the shift. 1 2 3 4 5

Machinery

Tools and methods of work are specialized to the purpose of the job. 1 2 3 4 5

Steering wheels/handles are operated, from standing position. 1 2 3 4 5

Operating mechanisms hamper body movements in the workspace. 1 2 3 4 5

Risk of injury due to lack of machine guarding. 1 2 3 4 5

Work Safety

Machine accessories cannot be fastened and removed easily. 1 2 3 4 5

Dangerous points, moving parts and electrical installations are not

adequately guarded. 1 2 3 4 5

Work Efficiency

Ergonomics are used for improving the efficiency of your work in the

kitchen. 1 2 3 4 5


- 121 -

تاداسلا ةنيدم ةعماج ،قدانفلاو ةحايسلا ةيلك 1

اليونانيتين بمعنى القوانين Ergon, Nomoiلفظ مشتق من كلمتى Ergonomicsاإلرجونوميكس

إلى جميع اإلعتبارات المتعلقة الطبيعية للعمل، ويعتبر اإلرجونوميكس علم ومنظومة امتدت أخيرا هويمكن أن يطلق علي ،مة الفيزيائية والنفسية بين اآلالت والبشرئيتعلق بالمال علموهو، ريةبالحياة البشالعمل ليناسب العامل. ويهتم اإلرجونوميكس بمعالجة عناصر وأنظمة يهدف إلى تكييف الذى علم العمل

نها إصابات المشكالت المتعلقة باألعمال التى يصاحبها حركات متكررة لمدة طويلة والتى قد ينجم عمؤلمة لرسغ اليد أو فى الظهر من خالل التصميم السليم لمكان العمل ووضع األدوات دون االضطرار

عن متناول و اإلنحناء أو االمتداد بالجسم والذراع لتناول شىء أو تشغيل مفتاح بعيدا ألإللتفاف بالجسم قد و ،فى التطبيقات العسكرية م مصطلح علم هندسة الموارد البشرية1104اليد. وقد استخدم عام

وقد نجد فى مجال لكترونيات.واإلى أيضا فى علم النفس والفسيولوجى والبيولوج هظهرت تطبيقاتمكانية إالضيافة الكثير من الضوضاء وبيئة العمل المزدحمة وكذلك األحمال الثقيلة واألدوات الحادة و

لمتكررة والكثير من الضغط العصبى التعرض للصعق الكهربى واألدوات الساخنة والحركات ا، هذا وعلى سبيل المثال يؤدى إلى الحوادث واإلصابات العضلية الهيكلية للعاملين قد والجسمانى الذى

بليون 6فإن تعويضات حوادث اإلنزالق والسقوط فى المطابخ قدرت فى الواليات المتحدة بما يزيد عن .% من دعاوى اإلصابات المهنية35ية بما يقارب م كذلك قدرت الدعاوى القضائ1441دوالر عام

وقد أكدت النتائج أن أكثر أبعاد اإلرجونوميكس ارتباطا وتأثيرا على كفاءة العمل داخل المطبخ الفندقى هى )النشاط البدنى، تصميم مكان العمل، بيئة العمل(، على الترتيب. وبذلك فإن إشراك العامل فى إدارة

كه للمعرفة من أجل تحقيق األهداف المرغوبة أصبح ضرورة ملحه فى مثل وتخطيط العمل مع امتال هذة الصناعة )صناعة الفندقة(.

.قدانفلا ،خبطملا مقاط ،لمعلا ةئيب ،سكيمونوجرإلا

Investigating the Relation between Ergonomics and ...€¦ · efficiency of hotel kitchen staff. It...

Documents

Transcript of Investigating the Relation between Ergonomics and ...€¦ · efficiency of hotel kitchen staff. It...